Attention to appearances

My colleague Allan Woods has a great story in today's paper, which proves that every picture tells 1,000 words (or thereabouts).  Allan looked into what he describes as the "striking" and "puzzling" edict that went out this summer and look what he found...

It was a lazy Monday in July when orders went out to have Queen Elizabeth’s portrait hung in uniform fashion at embassies and consulates around the world, in part, officials say, to prepare for the Queen’s 60-year Jubilee in 2012.

But Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird apparently had a personal stake in the process when he found an outdated photo of himself hanging on the wall of Canada’s embassy in Mexico in mid-August, according to documents obtained by the Toronto Star.

Image and appearance are crucially important to Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government.

We learned this early in 2006, in fact, when we were told that the PM wanted to do press conferences in the Commons foyer (as opposed to the National Press Theatre)  because the foyer had the requisite flags and props of institutional authority. The PMO also told the press gallery that the government would use the National Press Theatre more if we renovated it to accommodate video screens and suitable backdrops (we did, by the way, at a substantial cost.)

On Harper's second official trip abroad as PM in 2006  -- the first was to Afghanistan -- reporters were told that he wouldn't be scrumming or making any remarks on the first day in Mexico because the PMO communications folks had decided  they wanted the coverage to be "all visuals." At the right here, you can see a product of that all-visuals planning. 

But let's get back to Baird. It is starting to be clear that within a government keenly fixated on image and props, he's definitely the keenest.  A couple of years ago, I was reliably told that Baird was the one who pushed hard for those big, oversized cheques at government-funding announcements.  We also know he's a big patron of the art bank, and of course, we know the attention to detail paid to his business card.   So is Baird the brand-manager-in-chief for the government? Or is he just its most assiduous minister in the attention-to-appearances campaign? 

In the private sector, this preoccupation with image is called branding, of course, and branding concerns aren't solely a concern of this government. Branding, let's remember, was also at the heart of Jean Chretien's post-referendum bid to plaster Quebec with flags and other images of Canadian  federalism in the late 1990s. (We'll remember how that turned out.)  During the Chretien years, as well, Industry Canada launched a major "brand Canada" initiative, largely under the overview of another savvy marketer-politico, Brian Tobin.

Harper's Conservative government has also been wrapping itself in the flag as of late, though Heritage Minister James Moore insists that the difference between this flag obsession and Chretien's is that no one is going to be forced to fly  the Maple Leaf. 

I am enduringly intrigued by all this political attention to branding -- it's going to be a big part of the book I'm writing right now (due out next year.) I haven't decided yet whether it's a good or bad thing. I suppose with many things in politics (or life) that it can be troubling if image matters more than substance. Or worse, if image is confused with substance. 

 ** The little branding chart, above, comes from a website called: http://www.onlinebrandingcompany.ca/  I like it because it shows how the ingredients of marketing can also be applied to politics. (Repetition, i.e., familiar to all of us who have to endure talking points from the politicos.) Do check out the website for a larger image and some of their wisdom about branding.*** 

 

Comments

[Darwin O'Connor]

In capitalism companies are supposed to compete on who has be best price and quality. Branding attempts to undermine that by creating emotional attachments in consumer's mind so they are willing to pay more for a similar quality good. It has become so effective that people will pay a premium to have a companies brand displayed prominently their clothes.

In democracy people are supposed to vote on who will provide the best governance. Branding tries to convince votes that a party is does better then they actually are.

The media are supposed to keep the people informed, so when a party is doing something for branding reasons rather then good governance, you should point that out clearly to your audience. You may have to repeat yourself a lot, but that is what needs to be done to get the message across.

[Gabby in QC]

A red rose in the suit jacket lapel ...
Le p’tit gars de Shawinigan ...
The deficit slayer/juggernaut …
A reporter’s red boots ...

Are those not forms of branding, be they labels hung on the “wearer” by someone else or self-imposed?
So, the Conservatives are not the only ones who engage in "branding."

[Caroline Kalaydjian]

Actually, branding is not necessarily connecting to paying a premium price. Branding involves communicating the positioning of a product, service or person. For example, WalMart's positioning is low cost retailer of good and services. WalMart's branding would revolve around that positioning statement, and yes, any good marketing or branding strategy would create experential tactics that would deliver and reinforce that positioning in consumers' minds.

In the case of politics today, we are very much in an era of consumerism, whereby the same branding, positioning and marketing campaigns traditionally used for consumer goods are being used to establish political parties' or leaders' positioning and unique selling proposition.

Its too bad that they're not spending more time on the substance of the party and its policies, which is the crux of the matter. Consumer good companies first developed sound products that delivered some manner of quality, need or want, before developing marketing campaigns. Its seems todays politics have forgotten that essential first step. Sooner or later, as with consumer goods that fail to deliver some need or want, or have a significant gap between promised positioning and actual positioning, and go by the wayside, we will realize that the political parties of today resemble the emperor with no clothes.

[Ottawegian]

"Heritage Minister James Moore insists that the difference between this flag obsession and Chretien's is that no one is going to be forced to fly the Maple Leaf."

Really? Have you read the private member's bill designed to criminalize condo boards that forbid the flying of the flag from balconies? It seems to have government support.